I am going to buy a new lens for my Nikon DSLR camera. Should i buy the 50mm f/1.4D or the cheeper f/1.8?

I am Buying a lense specifically for club/concert photography. There are 2- the Nikon 50mm f/1.4D AF Nikkor ( close to 300$) and the Nikon 50mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor Lens(about 120$) should i go with the cheaper one, even though it does not have as wide an aperture? will it make a difference at all?

I have to agree with Photoace. I got the 1.8 lens just to serve as a backup to my zoom lens. I could not justify the extra expense of the 1.4. 1.8 is already a pretty large f-stop; in a concert you may have a little difficulty with your depth-of-field focus if you are wide open.

Save your money

ISO wise you are looking at the difference of 100 ISO and 125 ISO

Although the apparent difference is approximately 1/3 stop, there are other factors to consider.

The f1.4 will likely provide a brighter image in the viewfinder.

The design of the lenses will also be different since the f1.4 has more light "gathering" capability. This design difference might mean a shutter speed at f1.4 of 1/60 second while the f1.7 might need 1/30 second under the same conditions.

With either lens you'll still need to increase the ISO to get photos under the conditions you describe.

Neither lens will give optimum results wide open. Lenses give the best results at f8 to f11. (Back in the late 1970's Lieca had an f1.0 lens. Wide open it was not very good but it sold rather well.)

If your budget allows, go for the f1.4

If you really want 50mm then get the f/1.4. The extra stop could make the difference between a good shot and a blurry one. However, I question whether 50mm is the right size. Unless you in the front row, you won't have much zoom power.

Instead, I'd buy a Nikon VR lens. You can zoom in and benefit from +3 stops provided by the anti-vibration feature. Yeah - it's expensive, but your photos will be priceless.

If you can possibly afford the faster f/11.8D AF go for it in a heartbeat! It'll really shine in low light conditions and fast moving sports photography. In both situations you'll not need as wide aperture settings therefore you'll always have better depth of field.
If you don't want depth of field simply increase shutter speeds and open the aperture. It'll accomplish the same thing as a the slower 1.8 lens.
If your not an exacting perfectionist the slower lens will due just fine. One important thing: Resist trying to save a buck by investing in anything but genuine Nikkor Lenses. I wish you would have included the DSLR you're using.

Of course, there is probably not much tangible difference, but if you have the money, the cool factor of the f/1.4 might be worth it. I had a Pentax Spotmatic with an f/1.4 lens that was stolen from me. I replaced it with a camera that came with an f/1.7 lens and I missed the soft background that came so easily with that gorgeous f/1.4.

The 50mm f/1.8 lens is the best buy of all the Nikon prime lenses. It's also a stellar performer. The f/1.4 lens is brighter, which is an advantage, but you can save money, get the f/1.8 lens, and just turn the ISO up on your camera. Odds are, if you can't get the image at a concert with the 50mm f/1.8, you couldn't have gotten it with the 50mm f/1.4 either.

Save your money and boost the ISO.